Rush Limbaugh vs Sandra Fluke - My Opinion

Ok some of you have asked me for my thoughts on the whole Rush Limbaugh debacle and first let me say that I don't listen to Limbaugh regularly ( because I have better things to do like watch paint dry) but sometimes I agree with him and sometimes I disagree. Putting my personal feelings aside, it bothers me the way Conservatives like he and Ann Coulter, for example, are not allowed to have personalities. Now don't get me wrong, his personal attacks towards Sandra Fluke - calling her a slut, went too far but I agree with his overall sentiments. You know it's not enough that in history contraceptives became legal (yes there was a time when they were illegal ) and women and men are free to purchase them. Now, that's not good enough and many Liberals want private insurance companies to be forced to provide them. Listen folks, putting all the moral/religious conflicts aside (because they are irrelevant really), it is unconstitutional for the federal government to coerce a private business to sell a certain product. I would argue that some women (certainly not all or most) have a medical necessity for birth control and those needs should be addressed if no other solution is available. Sandra Fluke is using the medical need that SOME women have to get birth control for herself because she says that birth control is too expensive while in law school. Her need is not a medically necessary one and her motives are selfish. She is taking advantage of the fact that there are women for whom it is a necessity so her sexual habits will be covered - Shame on you Ms. Fluke! It's just like the Liberals who are pro-abortion and they just want to be able to have abortions paid for by someone else so they say "But what about the women who become pregnant from rape or incest? Should they be forced to have the baby?" They purposely present the worst possible scenario in order to appeal to people's emotions rather than reason. They know full well that the overwhelming majority of women who have abortions do so as a form of birth control and women who want to have one after rape or incest are absolutely the small minority. In fact, over 85% of pregnant rape victims DO NOT have abortions, but, I digress. What troubles me even more is that Sandra Fluke along with many other women who want their contraceptives covered almost never consider the other options. So, here they are:

#1 If you can't afford safe sex, then STOP having sex until you CAN! (for the record I support abstinence before marriage)

#2 Look at your expenses and cut back in other areas (cut the $5 a day StarBucks habit or do your own pedicures & manicures if having sex is THAT important to you.)

#3 Go to the government run health clinic and get low to no cost contraceptives like everyone else! (Does Ms. Fluke think she is too good for this?)

#4 Georgetown University's insurance is mandatory & there is only one choice, so she could start a movement to have a choice on campus or get a supplemental plan that pays for it or reduces the cost of contraceptives - that would earn more respect than thinking she is "entitled" to it & trampling over the Constitution.

and finally:

#5 Listen Ms Fluke, if your boyfriend wants some "loving" make HIM pay! Sandra Fluke says birth control costs her around $3000 for the entire time she will be in law school ( $1000/year). Listen, she's not having sex by herself (maybe that should be #6) so if he wants to sleep with her HE can split the cost or pay for it entirely. The taxpayers are not benefitting from providing her with birth control pills nor do we want to! Some of us can barely afford our own contraceptives, let alone those of others. Rush Limbaugh expressed this crudely by saying she should provide us with a video of her sexual acts if we have to pay for them, (come on now Rush!) but I understand his use of absurdity to make a point and where he is coming from!

Another interesting point is that feminists like Sandra Fluke and Nancy Pelosi think that Conservatives who think like me and private insurance companies that do not cover birth control are "infringing upon the rights of women". Bear in mind that no one is preventing a woman from obtaining contraceptives, you just can't force a particular company to make it available for them. Women are free to get prescriptions from their doctors and fill them at one of the numerous government run health clinics at low or no cost,or any pharmacy in the world if their insurance does not cover them. Ms. Fluke and all of her liberal feminist friends,overlook the fact that it is they who discriminate against men! It is ironic to me that those fighting against private insurance companies that don't cover contraceptives and abortifacients, want them, to cover them in the name of "women's health" but they do not campaign for free condoms or vasectomies for men! - as if a woman can get pregnant without a man. Even a test tube baby requires male sperm. Is this reverse gender discrimination perhaps?

The bottom line is that we are each responsible for our own behavior and habits. I don't care what anyone else does in the privacy of their bedroom and I'd appreciate it if Liberals would stop trying to force us to participate in a menage a trois of sorts, by shoving us into their bedrooms with our tax dollars and their partners - No thanks! Not interested! What is next paying for cigarettes for people who can't afford them or forcing Marlboro to hand them out for free or low cost? I don't approve of Limbaugh's name-calling and the crude nature of his remarks, but I certainly agree with his underlying sentiments. The tax payers are not "Johns" and if you want to have sex pay for your own dam condoms, birth control and abortions (and no I don't approve of nor support abortion) - leave the private sector alone and stay out of taxpayers pockets!

There was no 'outrage' when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a 'C**t' or the remarks made about her daughter and Alex Rodriguez. The 'Left' yucked it up.

To "me', I think it strange that a woman would expose her 'sex life' and the extent of it, then demand that her insurance company 'finance it'. What would 'you' think she was?

"Our" problems, as Conservatives, is our 'representatives' are allowing the Left to set the narrative. They set it and the Establishment Republicans go on the defensive. This isn't about 'Women's Health', but the Establishment Republicans are following the narrative.

Conservatism gave them the House and increased the numbers in the Senate. Could be we need to 'clean House and Senate' of these Establishment types and elect some MORE people willing to represent Conservatism and the rule of law outlined in The Constitution that the Left is dismantling...One Amendment at a time.

I disagree with Limbaugh's language mainly because this is a pivotal election year & we don't need all of this drama. I know that men on the left have spewed equally offensive or worse vitriol but two wrongs don't make a right. I agree that we should not allow the left to set the narrative though.

And again...it is the Establishment Republicans that are going along with the narrative. We didn't like Mitt Romney 4 years ago. And the Establishment 'want' him. They sat back and allowed Conservative candidates to be run out of the campaign.

This isn't about 'wrongs making rights'. This is calling out a woman for what she is 'voluntarily' proporting herself to be and believing that she has a 'right' to have her insurance company cover her 'behavior'.

Certainly there 'are' other medical affects birth control pills offer. But doesn't Planned Parenthood offer them for free? We had that issue a few months ago. And for those other affects, a 'doctor's note' to the insurance company should suffice.

This is ALL about whether we will continue to allow government to grow or put the brakes on. Rush didn't 'have' to be so harsh. It did backfire. But this is just more example of the Left being allowed to shape the dialog.

There are consequences for that though - that's all I'm saying. The GOP race this time around has been a circus and this incident does not help, that's all I'm saying. This women can go to a government clinic and get them for free or low cost or she can go to PP where birth control pills cost $15 - $50 per month and condoms are free which is much cheaper than her so-called $1000/month figure which is bs too - bc does not cost that much per year. Either way we know now she is a phony plant who KNEW GU's insurance policy before she got there and knew contraceptives were not covered, but decided to attend so she could challenge the insurance coverage. The cat is out of the bag now. She is not the poor little 23 year old law student, she is a 30 year old activist who pulled this stunt for her own selfish reasons. I just think Limbaugh's timing was bad. He could comment w/o calling her a slut but he's a shock jock looking to keep ratings high so......